Striking a balance between ideals and reality

In the end, the development of Korean politics depends on who looks at reality and ideals in a harsh yet harmonious way.

KIM SEUNG-JUNGThe author is a professor of archaeology at the University of Toronto. I had a chance to think about the fundamental differences between Greek and Roman art as I prepared an introductory lecture on art history. We often think of these two periods together, but there are fundamentally different ways of thinking. In ancient Greece — the birthplace of direct democracy — the dominant trend was to pursue collective homogeneity from an equal standpoint rather than individual characteristics. As a result, only an extremely idealized human figure was displayed. The statues and sculptures from Greece’s heyday show beautiful faces of people in their 20s.

The ancient Romans, on the other hand, respected individual uniqueness and developed the concept of a portrait that depicts real-life individuals. Rome had a tradition of worshiping ancestors and respecting the elderly, which resulted in a standard practice of depicting the wrinkled faces of old people. Unlike the Greeks who were bound by the cult of youth, Romans were awed by accumulated experiences and wisdom.

Another interesting contrast between Greek and Roman art is the attitude towards historical facts. Greek public art did not directly describe specific events, individuals or realistic themes. Instead, stories from mythology and legends were used figuratively. The Parthenon, which was built to commemorate the victory of the Greek-Persian War, features sculptures depicting battles of gods and heroes. The battle scenes consistently describe confrontations between civilized allies and barbaric enemies, praising the Greeks for defeating the “barbaric” Persian army.

In contrast, ancient Romans expressed and commemorated historical events without hesitation from the start. Roman art reflects realistic and direct experiences. The customs and morality of Western society we see now are a combination of the Roman realism and Greek idealism. In the end, the development of Korean politics depends on who looks at reality and ideals in a harsh yet harmonious way.